« Red County/OC Blog News Roundup -- December 2, 2007 | Main | Red County/OC Blog News Roundup -- December 3, 2007 »

December 02, 2007



Andy Favor

I don't agree with this endorsement, so I guess we just need to work harder. Remember to donate to the Ron Paul campaign on December 16th.


The notion that "John McCain is man to lead america" I do agree. However, more people are favoring Mike Huckabee now. I am happy that John MacCain has received good endorsement and as Tomahawk has said, he has strong substance to lead this country.Nice report Tomahawk!

George Annillo

To Whom It May Concern:

I have attached a Word file for an article I wrote: Why A Mormon, Why Romney Should NOT Be President.
I hope you will consider publishing it as part of a perspective that people should consider.
I wrote it because religion and politics IS AND HAS BEEN mingled with disastrous result in the last decade.

Thank you for your consideration.
George Annillo
Brief Biography
Education: B.S. Physics (St. Peter’s College), Th.M. Theology (Dallas Theological Seminary), writer, teacher, according to some of the “faithful,” I’d be considered a backslider. These days, stepping back, seems a good thing.
Contact Information:
17056 16th Avenue SW
Normandy Park, WA 98166

P.S. I have sent this to numerous New Hampshire newspapers.
I have also included the content of the article in this email for convenience.

Why A Mormon, Why Romney Should NOT Be President

“Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back….for in the field of economic and political philosophy there are not many who are influenced of new theories after they are twenty-five or thirty years of age, so that the ideas which civil servants and politicians and even agitators apply to current events are not likely to be the newest. But, soon or late, it is ideas, not vested interests, which are dangerous for good or evil.” (italics added)

John Keynes, probably the most influential political economist of the last century, concluding sentences of The General Theory.

DANGEROUS IDEA. Spring, 1820, Palmyra, NY: At the age of 14, God appeared to me for the first time. He told me I was foreordained to be his profit. Three years later the resurrected angel Moroni (he was originally the last Nephrite prophet in the year, A.D. 421) told me the location of the secret, ancient gold plates which revealed the true gospel. Moroni also gave me a special tool that would enable me to accurately translate the gold plates’ secret truths from reformed Egyptian characters into English (The Urim and Thummim is an ancient instrument that the Old Testament says God provided to His prophets [Exodus 28:30]) . At age 23, John the Baptist himself conferred the Aaronic Priesthood on me. Then Peter, James, and John conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood on me and Oliver Cowdery. Two years later, it was revealed to us that the site for the new City of Zion would be Independence, Missouri. Within two years after that, the mobs ran us out of town and we fled across the Missouri River and established the Temple in Kirtland, Ohio. In January of 1844, my church tried to get me on the ballot as a candidate for president of the United States, but instead we were jailed. Postmortem: On June 27, 1844, Joseph and his brother, Hyrum Smith were killed by his angry “followers.”

I wish I could dismiss this as the plot of a new Raiders of the Lost Ark movie, but this is a serious summary of Mormon founder Joseph Smith’s life and ideas. You can verify this history on the Mormon, Church of Latter Day Saints (CLDS), website (http://www.lds.org/churchhistory/presidents/controllers/potcController.jsp?leader=1&topic=events). And this is a serious article, intended not to mock Mormonism, but to raise questions that Romney should answer about what he believes is true and possible. Questions that ask us to test Romney’s judgment about what he is willing to believe. It is, indeed, a hope that voters and reporters will ask the candidates, especially Romney, serious questions about their religious ideas before we follow the Bush with another president who takes actions influenced heavily by religious ideas. Questions that will enable us to know what we should believe about person who accepts such doctrines. To know how his beliefs might influence his decisions as president. To know what dangers Mormon beliefs present to us as Americans, indeed all people, living in this world made dangerous by the adoption of irrational, intolerant religious beliefs. To suggest, as Romney does, that inquiry into his religion is off limits is to demonstrate a naïveté of the world we’ve lived in for the last seven years. A world made more dangerous because of individuals who hear “voices in the air” that they believe to be God’s and that voice tells them to go to war and terror.

A Mormon must accept these beliefs, not only as possible, but as The truth. So before you vote for him, here are some examples of Mormon beliefs and the questions we should ask Mitt Romney.
1. Do you believe that God spoke directly to Joseph Smith a mere 180 years ago and told him to judge everyone before as wrong claiming the Mormon Church is ““the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth” ( Doctrine and Covenants 1:30)?
2. Don’t such beliefs imply that Mormons would accept the possibility of future, authoritative revelations from God? Indeed, doesn’t the Mormon church claim to have received direct, divine revelations from God even after Joseph Smith? And isn’t that dangerous as illustrated by the beliefs and actions of George Bush and Muslim Jihadists who believe they are carrying out God’s directives?
3. In your December, 2007 speech you said, “Perhaps the most important question to ask a person of faith who seeks a political office, is this: does he share these American values: the equality of human kind…” Yet, didn’t the Mormon Church only change it’s doctrine about blacks in 1978, allowing them in the church for the first time 15 years after Civil Rights was the law of the land? And doesn’t that imply that the Mormon God was initially racist, initially wrong and only 30 years ago “God changed His mind”? And what does that say about the possibility that other Mormon beliefs are wrong or might be. Wouldn’t that undermine the whole Mormon claim that Joseph Smith got it all right through gold tablets and a secret special tool?

If you as a voter can accept such claims to absolute truth and that every other church is wrong, if you can accept a president who believes in such direct, divine revelation (through gold plates and magic spectacles), both in the past and the possibility that it can continue, then you can vote for Mitt Romney. But if the political activism of religions and religious leaders claiming direct revelations in the past decade, indeed throughout history, is any guide then, more often than not, the results are crusades, inquisitions, jihads, holy wars, death, and condemnation all in the name of following gods of peace and justice.

When Huckabee raised questions about Mormon beliefs, Romney said there was nothing wrong with a candidate drawing contrasts on issues, "but I think attacking someone's religion is really going too far….It's just not the American way, and I think people will reject that." Mitt Romney—religion is an issue! And I hope it is the American way to inquire into the legitimacy, implications and risks of a candidate’s ideas, religious or secular. After Huckabee’s remarks, the media reported Huckabee’s apology—the candidates reconciled. But in reality, there is a division between the Mormon Church and most other Christian faiths (indeed all other faiths) in which each believes the other to be wrong—so deeply wrong as to publicly say that the other is not even a legitimate Christian Church (See, e.g., Richard Land’s comment, Southern Baptist Convention).

It is impossible for a person to totally separate his values from his leadership and decision making process—indeed we would not want a president to do so. Knowing candidates’ beliefs now could be an important predictor of their behavior in the future. Separation of church and state never intended that—indeed we could never legislate that. It simply means that the state should not establish or support one religion over another. Religious beliefs should be as much on trial as any beliefs a candidate holds and are a measure of their judgment and values. We should thus ask Romney about the soundness of a person’s judgment who believes that God gave his church the exclusive monopoly on truth by means of gold plates and magic spectacles. As Weisburg stated in “Romney’s Religion”: “Not applying a religious test for public office, means that people of all faiths are allowed to run—not that views about God, creation, and the moral order are inadmissible for political debate. In George W. Bush's case, the public paid far too little attention to the role of religion in his thinking. Many voters failed to appreciate that while Bush's religious beliefs may be moderate Methodist ones, he was someone who relied on his faith immoderately, as an alternative to rational understanding of complex issues.” (Slate, online magazine, Dec. 20, 2006. http://www.slate.com/id/2155902)

Romney has often evaded answering questions during debates on what he would do by saying, I’ll check with the experts: when asked about Iraq, he said, I’ll consult with the generals; when asked if water boarding is torture, he said, I’ll have to consult with the lawyers. So when and on what matters will he consult with the Mormon Church? On what matters will he risk apostasy and act contrary to Mormon doctrine (and its corrections to “divine revelation”). And we should not easily accept claims of Mormon tolerance. If you read the Mormon web site, it’s easy to see that tolerance for Mormons means only patience with the fact that everyone else is wrong, not acceptance of any other churches’ legitimacy. Neither is any individual Mormon allowed to exercise judgments other than what the Mormon church holds in its official Doctrine and Covenants.

To ignore these questions, to not examine our own beliefs about the mingling of religion, the possibility of direct, authoritative revelations from God and politics is to leave unchallenged “madmen in authority” with “ideas which are dangerous for good and evil.” There is a subtle, but profound difference between people of faith striving to follow God and those who claim that God spoke to them exclusively and authoritatively and directs them to action, especially as Commander in Chief. And for some reason, when men claim to have heard such a voice, it is to go to war. Yet all three of the world’s major faiths—Judaism, Christianity and Muslim say they believe in the voice of the Old Testament prophet, Isaiah: “And he [God] shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many peoples, and they shall beat their swords into plowshares….” It seems this God would rather we be farmers than warriors. That the warriors get it wrong and get rebuked!

To listen to those who claim to hear God’s voice, it is to continue this world on a path to dangerous religion—and one of the scariest, most distorted belief of all, one shared by some evangelicals and jihadist alike, is that by hastening to war and terror, they are delivering, ahead of schedule, the kingdom of God to earth. Romney, you, and all the candidate, are accountable to us for your beliefs, including your religious one.




This a big doubt for every person,they connot be sure who will be the next president.
Addiction Recovery New Hampshire

kevin edward

i think it is good. i really enjoyed it.i want to know more about it.


How can we 100% predict about the next president ,, Every individual have his own perception , so its too difficult to do that.



Drug Rehab


India-born entrepreneurs empower US voters

Shukoor Ahmed ran for a seat in the Maryland House of Delegates in 1998, after coming to America a decade earlier from Hyderabad, India. Campaigning door-to-door, he was surprised so many voters did not know who represented them!

After his race ended slightly short of victory, he took advantage of his Master’s degree in Computer Technology and Political Science to build StateDemocracy.org, a website he launched in 2001 to connect citizens and lawmakers. His website’s motto encapsulated its mission:

The comments to this entry are closed.